Transportation Research Board 2004 Annual Meeting Adaptive Signal Control Workshop Session 2: Field Experience January 11, 2004.

Transportation Research Board2004 Annual Meeting

Adaptive Signal Control Workshop

Session 2: Field Experience

January 11, 2004

By: Hazem El-Assar, P.E.By: Hazem El-Assar, P.E.

Orange County SCOOT SystemOrange County SCOOT System

Presentation Outline

• Background Challenges

• Potential Solutions

• Why SCOOT?

• Project Description

• Benefits Achieved

• Difficulties Faced

• Lessons Learned

Background Challenge #1Background Challenge #1High Traffic CongestionHigh Traffic Congestion

Background Challenge #2Background Challenge #2Convention Center EventsConvention Center Events

Background Challenge #3Background Challenge #3Convention Center Expansion

OCCC Expansion Facts

• 3 million square foot complex:– 2.1 million s.f. of exhibition space– 166,050 s.f. of meeting rooms – 92,000 s.f. of general assembly space – 3,600 parking spaces – Total cost $748 million – Opened November 2003

MULTIPLE EVENTS UP TO 80,000 ATTENDEES EACH

OCCC New Building

Background Challenge #4 Background Challenge #4 Unpredictable Tourist TrafficUnpredictable Tourist Traffic

Background Challenge #5Background Challenge #5Closely Spaced SignalsClosely Spaced Signals

Potential Solutions

• Free uncoordinated signals

• Officer traffic control

• TOD signal coordination

• Traffic Responsive Plans

• Adaptive Signal Control

SS

OOOO

echnique

plitplit

ffsetffsetptimizationptimization

CC

TT

ycleycle

SCOOT Adaptive Signal ControlSCOOT Adaptive Signal Control

Why SCOOT?

• Uses real-time upstream flow to adjust timing• Better suited for high volume minor movements• Widely used worldwide since 1981• Compatible with County’s existing Eagle signal

controllers• No need for additional field staff training• More cost effective installation under current

conditions

Local ControllerLocal Controller

Vehicle DetectorVehicle Detector

Central ComputerCentral Computer

How SCOOT WorksHow SCOOT Works

Central Computer

• SCOOT server– DEC Alpha running VMS

• Operator workstations– PC running Windows– LAN connected via X-Windows emulation– Remote dial-ins via terminal servers– Interface to existing network and workstations

using MONARC (now ACTRA)

Communication System

• Transmission Media

– County-owned fiber optic on arterial streets

– FDOT fiber optic on I-4

• Communications Methodology

– Single Mode fiber optic

– Multi Mode fiber optic

Local Controllers

• Existing cabinets

• New Eagle EPAC 300 controllers with SCOOT module

• Dedicated communication unit

• SCOOT detectors

General location:General location:

• International DriveInternational Drive

• Universal BoulevardUniversal Boulevard

Primarily Serving:Primarily Serving:

• Convention CenterConvention Center

• Parking GaragesParking Garages

• Hotels & RestaurantsHotels & Restaurants

• Tourist AttractionsTourist Attractions

Phase I

Phase II

Project LocationProject Location

Phase III

Project Schedule

• Phase I: May 2000 – 7 New Signals

• Phase II: November 2001 – 6 New Signals

• Phase III: October 2003 – 4 New Signals – 2 Modified Signals

Project Scope

• Replace existing controllers• Install fiber optic communications• Install loop detectors• Provide central hardware and software• Setup and validate the system• Design system maps and intersection graphics• Provide training to County staff

Project Costs

• Controller Upgrades $2,500 - $5,000/ intersection

• Detectors $10,000-15,000/ intersection

• Communications $2,500-$5,000/ intersection

• System Configuration, $5,000-$7,500/Validation, Fine Tuning intersection

• Central Hardware/Software $50,000

Operational Benefits Achieved

• Convention Center traffic ingress & egress has Convention Center traffic ingress & egress has been cleared efficientlybeen cleared efficiently

• Overall travel times and delays have been reducedOverall travel times and delays have been reduced• Officer control of signals is no longer necessaryOfficer control of signals is no longer necessary• Regular development and update of timing plans Regular development and update of timing plans

is not necessaryis not necessary• Timing adjustment during long or short term lane Timing adjustment during long or short term lane

closures is not necessaryclosures is not necessary• Real-time traffic data are monitored and archivedReal-time traffic data are monitored and archived

Annual Cost Comparison

• Detectors +$1,000/intersection• Support Agreement +$34,000• Central System $0• Controllers $0• Communications $0• Staff $0• Manual Traffic Control -$450,000

Net Annual Savings ~$400,000

Difficulties Faced

• No detectors on short links

• Long pedestrian phases

• Non-flexible phasing sequence

• Low volume traffic conditions

• Non-optimal signal progression

• Insufficient staff experience

• Only remote technical support

Lessons Learned

• TOD plans may provide better progression for recurring traffic conditions

• Negative impacts may occur in low volume traffic conditions

• Pre-determine optimal phasing based on traffic conditions or using other software

• Place detectors on all lanes, if possible• Avoid long pedestrian crossings

Thank You!

Hazem El-Assar, P.E.

Senior Engineer

Orange County Traffic Engineering

4200 S John Young Pkwy

Orlando, FL 32839

Ph: (407) 836-7866

Fx: (407) 836-7825

E-mail: [email protected]